Anything Considered

[Note: This is a long post.]

Being the nit-picker that I am, I’ve always noticed this apparent grammatical error in the Westminster Catechism:

The chief end of man is to glorify God, and to enjoy him forever.

An end of two ends? “And” is an awfully ambiguous word. Does it imply that we should be divided between the two pursuits? Are they mutually exclusive? Partially exclusive? Wholly inclusive? What exactly are we called to do?

I sincerely doubt that the writers made a grammatical mistake. After all, they were educated theological writers held in high regard. Therefore, consider that these “ends” are actually one and the same, that is, glorifying God and enjoying Him are mutually inclusive tasks. Perhaps I could rephrase this statement of the Catechism into something like:

The chief end of man is to glorify God by enjoying him forever.

For many years, I have considered this a possibility. Indeed, in times of blessing it becomes natural to enjoy His grace and favour and to glorify Him. But structuring the statement as such requires far deeper study for acceptance.

One of the most significant implications that arise is this: that to glorify God we are called to be self-sacrificing; to give up all that we have; to surrender our earthly pleasures in hope of future greater gain. In other words, there should be no link between our enjoyment and us glorifying Him, and that we should do the latter anyway.

This is Kantian ethics of a sort. Actions are considered right when they are performed out of a sense of duty; we do it because it is right, irrespective of the outcome (which may be uncontrollable) and without any intended personal gain. These actions are to be judged as ends in themselves, and not a means to some other end.

For example, it would be right to help an old lady to cross the street because I should render help to those in need. But if I were to help the old lady with an eye to gaining some form of benefit for my help, then it would be ethically wrong from a Kantian perspective.

I remember a speaker who once said this during a sermon, that during worship we should not be influenced by the music or the crowd; we worship God for His goodness because we are called to do so, irrespective of all other things. It makes sense, doesn’t it? But such a thought led me to struggle during worship sessions, thinking about whether the ‘high’ I felt was an emotional one arising from the music and the people around me, or a spiritual one from God. When this good feeling vanished, I pressed onward, telling myself that worship was my duty anyway. Suffice to say I have spent many unhappy hours in worship.

Is it possible to seek our own enjoyment? Is it right? I find very often that as a youth my views on Christianity are belittled as deviant and overly liberal. Indeed, it seems to be tradition that calls us to be self-sacrificing and unselfish. However, C.S. Lewis does not seem to agree.

In “The Weight of Glory”, he writes:

“The New Testament has lots to say about self-denial, but not about self-denial as an end in itself. We are told to deny ourselves and to take up our crosses in order that we may follow Christ; and nearly every description of what we shall ultimately find if we do so contains an appeal to desire.”

“If there lurks in most modern minds the notion that to desire our own good and earnestly to hope for the enjoyment of it is a bad thing, I submit that this notion has crept in from Kant and the Stoics and is no part of the Christian faith. Indeed, if we consider the unblushing promises of reward and the staggering nature of the rewards promised in the Gospels, it would seem that Our Lord finds our desires not too strong, but too weak.”

I have never thought that the commands in the Bible were written simply as rules to be followed. Instead, I have always believed that there was a purpose behind each command, in that it serves some higher good, perhaps even our good. “We know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose.” (Romans 8:28, NASV)

I do not know whether it is right to call seeking God for our pleasure a selfish act. But it has always been so hard to praise God selflessly, or to do something good purely out of a sense of duty.

Indeed, it is clear that to be unselfish is something in the negative. Don’t be selfish! But in the Bible, we are called to good things in the most positive sense. “But seek first his Kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well.” (Matthew 6:33, NIV)

Passion drives us, and a lack of passion implies stagnation. Clearly, we are people that need happiness and a sense of fulfilment in life. Apathy and unselfishness are empty, hollow states of mind that are deeply unsatisfying. I believe that as people we tend to gravitate towards what gives us the greatest pleasure. If the Church, or a church, insists that the way onward is to give up or to sacrifice our quest for a greater pleasure, then I would be very disappointed indeed.

I do not advocate hedonism in the worldly sense. But the fact that man constantly seeks excitement and pleasure is an indication of our need for satisfaction. I do not advocate making a god out of pleasure. But God is the ultimate and only answer to our search for pleasure. “O taste and see that the Lord is good!” (Psalm 34:8). “In your presence is fullness of joy; at your right hand are pleasures evermore.” (Psalm 16:11).

How can such clear-cut verses be denied?

If the deepest and most fulfilling pleasure is to be found in God, then surely, when we find our pleasure in Him, it is to His glory. If we were to deny this pursuit, we would be denying the reality of God to us.

My present loneliness is a gaping hole in my being that can only be filled by God. And I earnestly hope and pray that as I seek Him, He will come to fill me up with His love, grace, peace, and joy.